Order

PATRICIA D. BARKSDALE, Magistrate Judge.

On December 6, 2018, the Court heard argument on the defendants' motions asking the Court to order psychiatric exams of the plaintiffs and to bifurcate discovery pending a ruling on the plaintiffs' motion for class certification, Docs. 63, 66.

For the reasons stated on the record, the Court denied as moot the motion asking the Court to order psychiatric exams, Doc. 63, without prejudice to refiling the motion once the parties determine the dates, times, and places of the exams and further confer on the issue of the presence of counsel at the exams.

For the reasons stated on the record, the Court denied the motion to bifurcate discovery, Doc. 66, to the extent the motion sought to limit discovery to class-certification issues, without prejudice to raising discovery objections on other grounds. The Court granted the motion to the extent the Court directed the parties to conduct discovery in phases. Before a ruling on class certification, any discovery seeking specific information about an individual (like medical records) is limited to the eight plaintiffs now named in the complaint.

The Court vacated the deadlines in the amended case management and scheduling order, Doc. 54, pending a ruling on the motion to dismiss the amended complaint and directed the parties to continue discovery, with the goal that discovery should be "just, speedy, and inexpensive," see Fed. R. Civ. P. 1. If the motion to dismiss the amended complaint is denied, Judge Howard will direct the parties to file a new case management report at that time.

In light of the relief sought (abolishment of the current policy and the development of new procedures and standards), the Court encourages the parties to continue to explore methods of resolving the case other than through traditional mediation.

If further discovery disputes arise, the parties may file a motion or call chambers, (904) 549-1950, to schedule a time to hear argument on the issues.

Ordered.